THE  UNIVERSITY 


OF  ILLINOIS 

LIBRARY 

621.182. 

Io9-f 

Collection  of  books 
written  by 

Members  of  the  Faculty 
of  .the 

College  of  Engineering 


OFFICIAL  PUBLICATION  OF 
IOWA  STATE  COLLEGE  OF  AGRICULTURE 
AND  MECHANIC  ARTS 


Vol.  15  APRIL  20,  1917  No.  34 


LOCOMOTIVE  TESTS 

With 

Iowa  and  Illinois  Coals 


BULLETIN  44 

ENGINEERING  EXPERIMENT  STATION 


Ames,  Iowa 


Published  Tri-Monthly  by  the  Iowa  State  College  of  Agriculture 
and  Mechanic  Arts.  Entered  as  Second-class  Matter  at  the  Post 
Office  at  Ames,  under  the  Act  of  Congress  of  August  24,  1912. 


STATE  BOARD  OF  EDUCATION 
Members 


Hon.  D.  D.  Murphy,  President  Elkader 

Hon.  Geo.  T.  Baker  Davenport 

Hon.  Chas.  R.  Brenton  Dallas  Center 

Hon.  P.  K.  Holbrook  Onawa 

Hon.  Edw.  P.  Schoentgen  Council  Bluffs 

Hon.  H.  M.  Eicher  Washington 

Hon.  Frank  F.  Jones Villisca 

Hon.  Paul  Stillman  Jefferson 

Hon.  W.  C.  Stuckslager Lisbon 


Finance  Committee 


Hon.  W.  R.  Boyd,  President  Cedar  Rapids 

Hon.  Thomas  Lambert  Sabula 

Hon.  W.  H.  Gemmill,  Secretary  Des  Moines 


ENGINEERING  EXPERIMENT  STATION 
Station  Council 

(Appointed  by  the  State  Board  of  Education) 


Raymond  A.  Pearson,  LL.  D President 

Anson  Marston,  C.  E Professor 

Louis  Bevier  Spinney,  B.  M.  E Professor 

Samuel  Walker  Beyer,  B.  S.,  Ph.  D Professor 

Warren  H.  Meeker,  M.  E Professor 

Fred  Alan  Fish,  M.  E.  in  E.  E Professor 

Martin  Francis  Paul  Costelloe,  B.  S.  in  C.  E.,  A.  E Professor 

Allen  Holmes  Kimball,  M.  S Professor 


Thomas  Harris  MacDonald,  B.  C.  E..  .Chief  Engineer,  Iowa  Highway  Commission 

Station  Staff 


Raymond  A.  Pearson,  LL.  D President,  Ex-Officio 

Anson  Marston,  C.  E Director  and  Civil  Engineer 

Charles  S.  Nichols,  C'.  E Assistant  to  Director 

Louis  Bevier  Spinney,  B.  M.  E Illuminating  Engineer  and  Physicist 

Samuel  Walker  Beyer,  B.  S.,  Ph.  D Mining  Engineer  and  Geologist 

Warren  H.  Meeker,  M.  E Mechanical  Engineer 

Fred  Alan  Fish,  M.  E.  in  E.  E Electrical  Engineer 

Martin  Francis  Paul  Costelloe,  B.  S.  in  C.  E.,  A.  E Agricultural  Ehgineer 

Allen  Holmes  Kimball,  M.  S Structure  Design  Engineer 

T.  R.  Agg,  C.  E Highway  Engineer 

John  Edwin  Brindley,  A.  M.,  Ph.  D Engineering  Economist 

Max  Levine,  S.  B Bacteriologist 

Roy  W.  Crum,  C.  E Structural  Engineer 

Homer  F.  Staley,  M.  A Ceramic  Engineer 

D.  C.  Faber,  E.  E Industrial  Engineer 

H.  W.  Wagner,  M.  E Mechanical  and  Electrical  Engineer 

John  S.  Coye,  S.  B Chemist 

William  J.  Schlick,  C.  E Drainage  Engineer 

Harold  F.  Clemmer,  B.  S.  in  C.  E Testing  Engineer 

James  W.  Bowen,  A.  B.,  M.  A Assistant  Chemist 

W.  G.  Whitford  Research  Fellow  in  Ceramics 

A.  0.  Smith  Mechanician 


'UX,  b 


CONTENTS 


uuu 

Xe^f 

po 


VALUE  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  COAL  TESTS 5 

SUMMARIZED  RESULTS  OF  TESTS 6 

LENGTH  OF  ECONOMICAL  HAUL 8 

THE  TESTING  LABORATORY 11 

THE  TEST  LOCOMOTIVE 15 

MEASURING  INSTRUMENTS  15 

COALS  TESTED  15 

NOTES  ON  CONDITIONS  DURING  TEST  RUNS 17 

DETAILED  RESULTS  OF  TESTS— 

Basic  Averages  and  Totals  from  Readings 19 

Calculated  Boiler  Data 21 

Calculated  Engine  and  Brake  Data 25 

Notes  on  Individual  Results 29 

Indicator  Cards  31 

Group  Averages  39 

LIST  OF  TABLES 

Table  I.  Testing  Plant  Data 13 

Table  II.  Locomotive  Data  13 

Table  III.  Analyses  of  Coals  by  Car  Loads 16 

Table  IV.  Moisture  Content  and  Heat  Units  in  Coal  by  Test  Runs 16 

Table  V.  Analyses  of  Ash  and  Refuse 17 

Table  VI.  Basic  Averages  and  Totals — By  Individual  Test  Runs 24 

Table  VII.  Calculated  Results  of  Boiler  Trials — By  Individual  Test  Runs... 26 
Table  VIII.  Calculated  Results  of  Engine  and  Brake  Data — By  Individual 

Test  Runs  28 

Table  IX.  Averages  of  Readings  and  Results — By  Car  Loads  of  Coal 36 

Table  X.  Averages  of  Important  Readings  and  Results — By  Coals 38 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 

Fig.  1.  Graphic  Tabulation  of  Coal  Efficiencies 7 

Fig.  2.  Illustrative  Diagram  of  a Railroad  System 8 

Fig.  3.  General  View  of  Testing  Laboratory 10 

Fig.  4.  Detail  View  of  Brake  with  Dynamometer 12 

Fig.  5.  View  of  Test  Locomotive 14 

Fig.  6.  Rear  of  Testing  Laboratory 18 

Figs.  7 to  14.  Indicator  Cards  32-35 

Fig.  15.  Right  Hand  Brakes 40 

Fig.  16.  C.  & N.  W.  Locomotive  No.  1769  in  Testing  Position 40 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT 


The  coals  burned  during  the  tests  were  supplied  by  the  Chicago 
& Northwestern  Railway  Company.  Technical  assistance  and  sug- 
gestions were  given  by  Mr.  J.  C.  Little,  Mechanical  Engineer,  and 
other  officials  of  the  same  company. 

The  following  members  of  the  Iowa  State  College  staff  were  en- 
gaged on  different  phases  of  the  tests : 

Professor  E.  E.  King,  head  of  the  Railway  Engineering  Depart- 
ment, made  general  arrangements  for  the  work  and  had  general 
direction  of  it. 

Professor  R.  A.  Norman  of  the  Mechanical  Engineering  Depart- 
ment made  preliminary  outline  for  the  technical  work  and  acted  as  tech- 
nical advisor  during  the  test  runs  and  preparation  of  results. 

Mr.  H.  W.  Wagner  of  the  Engineering  Experiment  Station  had 
direct  charge  of  readings  and  preparation  of  results  for  publication  and 
was  assisted  with  readings  and  calculations  by  Mr.  George  Smullin, 
engineering  student. 

Analyses  of  coal,  ash,  and  flue  gas  were  made  by  the  Chemical 
Section  of  the  Engineering  Experiment  Station,  under  the  direction  of 
Mr.  J.  S.  Coye,  Chemist. 

Mr.  Chas.  Kinderman,  assisted  by  Mr.  H.  H.  Howard,  acted  as 
chief  mechanician  during  the  test  runs. 

Mr.  W.  H.  Meeker.  Professor  of  Mechanical  Engineering  and  Mr. 
W.  R.  Raymond,  Associate  Professor  of  English,  offered  helpful 
criticism  of  the  manuscript. 


5 


LOCOMOTIVE  TESTS  WITH  IOWA  AND 
ILLINOIS  COALS 


VALUE  OF  LOCOMOTIVE  COAL  TESTS 

Coal  is  one  of  the  large  items  in  the  expense  of  railway  operation. 
Not  only  does  its  first  cost  aggregate  an  enormous  sum,  but  its  trans- 
portation to  points  of  use  requires  a large  amount  of  equipment  and 
operating  service  often  sorely  needed  for  heavy  seasonal  commercial 
freightage.  Even  though  the  first  cost  of  coal  at  the  mine  may  be  re- 
duced to  a minimum  by  advantageous  contracts  with  large  coal  com- 
panies and  by  other  measures  of  economy,  the  final  cost  will  also 
depend  upon  the  cost  of  transportation.  It  is  for  this  reason  that 
railway  companies  are  interested  in  knowing  just  where  lies  the 
economical  limit  of  haul  between  any  two  coal  fields,  i.  e.,  how  far 
they  can  haul  the  locomotive  coal  from  one  mine  until  it  becomes 
cheaper  to  use  that  from  the  next. 

The  costs  of  locomotive  coals  per  unit  of  power  output  do  not 
depend  alone  upon  the  prices  per  ton  at  the  mine,  the  ton-miles  charged 
for  in  transportation,  and  the  expenses  per  ton  for  handling;  in  addi- 
tion to  these  there  must  be  considered  the  relative  values  per  ton  of  the 
coals  as  producers  of  power.  Operating  records  will  show  the  former 
costs,  but  the  relative  power  producing  values  of  coals  can  be  deter- 
mined only  by  scientific  tests  under  operating  conditions. 

This  problem  confronts  many  if  not  all  of  the  trunk  line  railroads 
crossing  Iowa,  and  involves  not  only  a comparison  of  Iowa  coals  with 
those  from  other  states,  but  also  a comparison  of  coals  from  different 
Iowa  fields.  Thus  it  is  to  assist  in  the  solution  of  this  problem  for 
the  railroads  of  Iowa  that  the  Engineering  Division  of  the  Iowa  State 
College  has  begun  a series  of  tests  in  its  new  Transportation  Labora- 
tory, in  co-operation  with  the  Iowa  railway  companies.  The  first 
group  of  tests,  here  reported,  was  in  co-operation  with  the  Chicago  & 
Northwestern  Railway  Company,  to  aid  in  determining  just  how  far 
they  can  afford  to  haul  their  coal  from  the  Benld,  Macoupin  County, 
Illinois,  mine  toward  their  Buxton  No.  18,  Monroe  County,  Iowa,  mine. 
The  coals  from  both  mines  were  compared  by  running  a number  of 
locomotive  efficiency  tests  and  by  studying  the  firing  and  steaming 
properties.  The  coal  was  burned  in  a locomotive  provided  two  years 
ago  by  the  Chicago  & Northwestern  Railway  Company  for  labora- 
tory testing  purposes. 


6 


SUMMARIZED  RESULTS  OF  TESTS 

Since  the  primary  object  of  this  investigation  was  to  determine 
relative  values  of  Iowa  and  Illinois  coals  under  certain  prescribed 
conditions,  the  following  summary  is  confined  largely  to  comparisons 
between  these  two  fuels. 

Proximate  and  calorific  analyses  show  but  little  difference  on  a 
dry  basis.  The  Iowa  coal,  however,  contained  more  moisture  than  the 
Illinois  coal.  Consequently,  as  received,  it  contained  less  heat  units 
per  pound  than  did  the  Illinois  coal. 

Little  important  difference  was  apparent  in  the  firebox.  Smoke 
was  noticeably  thinner,  however,  after  the  same  fireman  changed  from 
Illinois  to  the  first  carload  of  Iowa  coal.  Longer  test  runs  would 
have  told  more  concerning  the  clinkering  tendencies  of  ash  from  the 
two  coals.  It  was  observed,  however,  that  Iowa  coal  at  the  end  of  a 
run  left  a clinker  more  difficult  to  remove  than  that  from  Illinois  coal. 

Pounds  of  ash  and  refuse  were  higher,  with  a lower  percentage  of 
carbon,  for  runs  with  Illinois  coal.  This  comparison  is,  however,  of 
little  definite  value  because  of  the  difficulty  of  securing  representative 
amounts. 

Boiler  and  grate  efficiency  was  decidedly  higher  with  Iowa  than 
with  Illinois  coal.  According  to  Table  X,  the  advantage  by  difference 
is  5.1%  and  by  percentage,  8.7%. 

All  averages  of  other  factors  of  boiler  and  engine  performance 
based  upon  coal  fired  show  the  more  favorable  results  with  Iowa  coal. 
According  to  Table  X,  the  advantage  in  coal,  as  fired,  per  estimated 
draw-bar  horse-power-hour  is  0.54  pound,  or  7.0%  less  Iowa  than 
Illinois  coal.  The  advantage  in  plant  efficiency,  from  coal  to  draw-bar 
power  by  difference  is  0.38%  and  by  percentage,  11.6%  higher  for 
Iowa  than  for  Illinois  coal. 

It  does  not  seem  plausible  that  the  higher  average  boiler  and  grate 
efficiency  with  Iowa  coal  would  be  due  to  more  favorable  conditions 
existing  during  trials  on  Iowa  coals  than  those  on  Illinois  coals.  The 
furnace  and  flues  were  reasonably  clean  when  the  trials  began.  They 
were  cleaned  just  before  Run  No.  6,  yet  the  efficiency  of  Runs  6 and  7 
average  practically  the  same  as  for  Runs  1 to  5.  The  first  7 runs  were 
all  with  Illinois  coal.  Runs  8 to  1 1 on  Iowa  coal  were  made  directly 
after  Runs  1 to  7 and  with  the  same  fireman.  The  average  boiler  and 
grate  efficiency  for  Runs  1 to  7 was  58.9%  and  for  Runs  8,  9,  11  and  18 
was  65.1%.  Average  of  the  same  item  for  Runs  19  to  22  with  a 
different  fireman,  on  Iowa  coal,  was  62.9%.  The  average  load  carried 
was  greater  with  Illinois  than  with  Iowa  coal  ; but  in  Runs  8,  9,  11 
and  18  on  Iowa  coal  the  average  load  was  higher  and  the  efficiency 
was  also  higher  than  in  Runs  19  to  22  on  Iowa  coal. 

lust  how  far  the  results  of  these  trials  would  go  towards  repetition 
in  locomotives  of  other  types  cannot  be  foretold.  But  it  is  the 
opinion  of  able  engineers  consulted  on  the  subject  that  the  same 


Equivalent  Evaporation  (2/2°E)  perFbund  Coal  as  Fired. 


0 


/ 


8 

SO 

8 

-J 


s 

I 


1 

z 

3 

¥ 

6 
6 

\ • 7 

I 

/§  8 

Q; 

9 

a 

18 

19 

ZO 

Zt 

\ zz 


5 ■* 

j 


& 

i 


Average  for  Iowa  Coal 


0 100  ZOO  300  ¥00  500 

Boiler  Horse  Power  Developed. 


Average  for  Illinois 

Cool. 

FIG.  1. 


n 

f 

Cl 

.bg 

QQ 


£ 

$S. 

'§£ 

g*2 

k/  ^ 

I'S 

* M 

vj  • 


Graphic  Tabulation  of  Coal  Efficiencies  by  Runs.  Efficiencies  are  expressed 
in  terms  of  pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F.  per  pound  of 
coal  as  fired.  The  white  area  under  each  black  bar  represents  the  average  boiler 
horse  power  during  the  same  run. 


8 


general  comparisons  would  hold  for  larger  and  more  modern  loco- 
motives. 

The  evaporation  per  pound  of  coal  and  the  boiler  horse  power 
developed,  by  separate  runs  and  by  averages,  are  presented  in  graphic 
form  in  Fig.  1.  Knowing  the  evaporative  powers  of  certain  coals 
(as  for  example  the  averages  pictured  in  Fig.  1)  and  certain  com- 
mercial factors,  the  most  economical  length  of  haul  for  each  coal  can 
be  determined  approximately  by  means  of  a simple  formula.  Such  a 
formula  is  developed  under  the  next  heading. 

LENGTH  OF  ECONOMICAL  HAUL 

As  already  suggested  the  object  of  this  investigation  is  to  help 
determine  where  the  economical  limit  of  haul  lies  between  the  coal  of 
one  held  and  that  of  another.  Following  up  this  idea,  an  algebraic 
formula  is  derived  which  solves  the  distance  between  the  point  of 
economical  division  and  either  of  two  mines,  provided  certain  condi- 
tions are  known. 


FIG.  2. 

Illustrative  Diagram  of  a Railroad  System  with  Two  Coal  Fields. 


Referring  to  Fig.  2,  Bj  G D E Aj  represents  the  main  line  of  a 
railroad.  Coal  from  mine  A reaches  the  main  line  at  the  point  A±  and 
coal  from  mine  B reaches  the  main  line  at  the  point  B^  The  point 
of  economical  division  is  assumed  to  be  at  D ; that  is,  it  will  be  most 
economical  to  use  coal  from  mine  A between  A and  D,  and  coal  from 
mine  B between  B and  D.  The  distance  between  A1  and  D is  repre- 
sented by  x miles  and  is  to  be  solved  for. 

The  cost  of  mining  and  loading  coal  varies  between  mines:  the 
cost  of  freight  per  ton  per  mile  (per  ton-mile)  also  varies  on  different 
branch  lines.  Consequently  the  following  derivation  depends  upon 
a knowledge  of  the  total  costs  per  ton  of  coal  from  mine  A and  mine 
B delivered  at  At  and  Bu  respectively.  The  distance  n,  between 
A,  and  Bx,  is  easily  found.  The  total  cost  per  ton-mile  of  handling 
the  coal  between  points  Ax  and  Bx  must  also  be  known.  It  is  assumed 
to  be  constant  for  hauling  in  either  direction  and  for  either  coal,  and 


9 


includes  switching,  hauling,  unloading  at  the  chutes,  etc.  Tons  of 
equivalent  evaporation  per  ton  of  coal  from  mines  A and  B are  repre- 
sented by  Ea  and  Eb,  respectively,  and  are  determined  by  test.  For 
the  coals  used  in  this  particular  investigation,  item  57,  Table  X,  gives 
the  numerical  values  for  Ea  and  Eb. 

The  algebraic  work  follows: 

Given : 

a = total  cost  per  ton  of  coal  delivered  at  junction  point  Aj 
from  mine  A. 

b = total  cost  per  ton  of  coal  delivered  at  junction  point 
from  mine  B. 

f = cost  of  freight  and  handling  per  ton-mile  for  coal  between 
points  At  and  B^ 

Ea=tons  of  equivalent,  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F.  per  ton 
of  coal  from  mine  A. 

Eb=tons  of  equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F.  per  ton 
of  coal  from  mine  B. 


Assume : 

D is  the  point,  between  points  Ax  and  Bt,  at  which  the  total 
cost  of  coal  for  a unit  of  evaporation  is  the  same  for  coals 
from  mines  A and  B. 
x = distance  between  points  At  and  D. 

Cd=cost  of  either  coal  (delivered  at  the  point  D)  required  for 
one  ton  of  equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F. 

Then : 


Cd  = 

cd  = 

a -f-  xf 

Ea 


a + xf 
Ea 

b + (n-x)f 
'E,- 
_b-f  (n-x)f 

Eb 


and 

then 


Solving  for  x : 

aEb  -f-  xfEb  = bEa  nfEa  — xfEa. 

bEa  + nfEa  — aEb  or 
X~  fEb  + fEa 

Ea(b  + nf)  — aEb 
X_  f(Ea+Eb)  ' 

Units  of  costs  used  above  may  be  expressed  in  either  dollars  or 
cents,  but  the  same  unit  must  be  used  throughout  all  computations. 

In  case  f is  constant  for  the  main  line  A^i  and  for  the  branches 
AAt  and  BB^  n may  be  taken  as  the  distance  AA^B  and  x as  the 
distance  AAXD,  if  a is  used  as  the  cost  at  A and  b as  the  cost  at  B. 

For  the  branch  line  EF  which  must  receive  coal  through  the  junc- 
tion point  E,  it  would  be  more  economical  to  use  coal  from  mine  A, 
since  E is  between  At  and  D.  Likewise  it  would  be  more  economical 
to  use  coal  from  mine  B on  the  branch  line  GH. 


10 


General  Interior  View  of  the  Iowa  State  College  Locomotive  Testing  Laboratory.  The  feed  water  weighing  tanks 
and  reservoir  are  in  the  left  background.  The  dynamometer  pedestal  is  shown  under  the  firing  platform.  1 ne  sup- 
port wheels  and  brakes  are  in  the  pit  below  the  level  of  the  track. 


li 


The  above  formula  is  comparatively  simple  and  does  not  take  into 
account  certain  minor  factors  which  may  affect  the  economical  limit 
of  haul.  For  instance,  a coal  which  clinkers  worse  than  another  will 
not  stand  so  high  in  absolute  value  as  is  indicated  by  comparative 
evaporative  powers  of  the  two  coals.  Or  the  general  grade  may  be 
steeper  in  one  direction  on  the  main  line,  which  would  tend  to  move 
the  point  D farther  down  grade.  However,  the  actual  location  of 
point  D is  often  determined  in  practice  by  the  convenience  of  existing 
traffic  and  the  location  of  unloading  stations.  The  formula  will,  then, 
serve  as  a general  check  on  the  point  of  economical  division. 

THE  TESTING  LABORATORY 

The  testing  laboratory,  as  pictured  in  Figs.  3 and  6,  is  entirely 
modern  and  of  sufficient  size  and  capacity  to  accommodate  the  largest 
Mikado  locomotives.  While  it  is  planned  ultimately  to  equip  the  plant 
with  a 125,000-lb.  capacity  dynamometer  for  measuring  directly  the 
draw-bar  pull  of  the  locomotives,  as  yet  only  the  pedestal  has  been  in- 
stalled ; to  this  the  engine  is  tied  by  a heavy  draw-bar  and  two  safety 
bars,  all  fitted  with  turnbuckles.  Until  the  large  capacity  dynamometer 
is  provided,  the  approximate  draw-bar  pull  is  determined  by  spring  dyna- 
mometers connected  to  the  water  brake  casings. 

When  the  locomotive  is  in  testing  position,  each  driving  wheel 
rests  upon  a support  wheel.  Directly  opposite  each  other,  the  support 
wheels  are  shrunk  to  the  same  shaft  or  axle.  For  each  pair  of  support 
wheels  there  are  provided  two  Alden  triple  disc  water  brakes  of 
sufficient  capacity  to  absorb  the  energy  from  the  drivers  of  the  largest 
locomotives.  Each  brake  has  three  iron  discs  which  are  fastened  to 
the  axle  and  which  revolve  with  it.  Each  iron  disc  turns  between  a 
separate  pair  of  comparatively  flexible  copper  diaphragms  whose 
perimeters  are  clamped  into  an  outer  casing  which  is  held  from  turning 
by  a Kohlbusch  spring  dynamometer  of  6,000-lb.  capacity.  See  Figs. 
4 and  15. 

The  support  wheels  arjd  axles  were  given  to  the  Iowa  State  College 
by  the  Midvale  Steel  Company  of  Philadelphia. 

Each  dynamometer  measures  the  rotative  pull  on  the  brake  in  the 
same  way  as  do  the  scales  of  a Prony  brake.  So  from  the  sum  of  all 
the  brake  readings  is  figured  the  draw-bar  pull.  Then  with  the  addi- 
tion of  speed  readings,  the  draw-bar  horse  power  is  calculated. 

The  draw-bar  pull  is  varied  by  changing  the  friction  between  brake 
discs  and  diaphragms.  This  friction  is  controlled  by  the  pressure  of 
water  which  circulates  between  the  copper  diaphragms  and  which 
carries  away  the  heat  developed  by  friction  from  mechanical  power. 
Friction  surfaces  are  lubricated  by  oil  under  pressure.  In  applying 
the  water  pressure  to  these  brakes  it  is  arranged  to  control  them  all 
at  a central  valve  pit  located  to  the  rear  of  the  engine,  or  to  regulate 
each  one  individually.  But  owing  to  the  difficulty  of  knowing  the 
load  on  the  wheels  when  operating  from  the  valve  pit,  it  was  found 


12 


FIG.  4. 

Detail  View  of  Alden  Hydraulic  Brake  with  Kohlbusch  Spring-  Dynamo- 
meter. Water  inlet  is  at  the  lower  hose  connection  and  the  water  outlet  is  at 
the  upper  hose  connection.  The  smaller  pipes  are  for  oil  supply  and  drainage. 


13 


necessary  to  control  each  pressure  at  the  brake  where  the  load  on  each 
individual  dynamometer  could  be  readily  observed.  Hand  control 
valves  in  both  the  inlet  and  outlet  pipes  make  it  possible  to  regulate 
not  only  the  pressure  but  also  the  quantity  of  cooling  water  through 
the  brakes. 

It  is  not  intended  to  give  here  a detailed  description  of  the  testing 
plant,  but  Table  I is  included  to  show  a few  dimensions  and  other 
data  which  bear  directly  upon  the  test  results. 


TABLE  I 

TESTING  PLANT  DATA 


Number  of  feed  water  weighing-  tanks 2 

Capacity  of  each  feed  water  weighing  tank,  gallons  340 

Capacity  of  coal  weighing  scales,  lb 3,500 

Maximum  draw-bar  pull  for  which  dynamometer  pedestal  is  designed,  lb...  125, 000 

Number  of  support  wheels  8 

Number  of  support  wheels  used  for  runs  1-22 4 

Diameter  of  support  wheels,  inches 52 

Length  of  brake  arm.  inches  26  A 

Capacity  of  each  brake  dynamometer,  lb 6,000 

TABLE  II 


LOCOMOTIVE  DATA 

Railway  

Type  

Class  

Number  

Weight  of  engine  in  working  order,  lb 

Weight  on  drivers,  lb 

Weight  on  truck,  lb 

Theoretical  tractive  force,  lb.  

Number  of  driving  wheels  

Driving  wheel  diameter,  in 

Cylinder  diameter,  right  side,  in 

Cylinder  diameter,  left  side,  in 

Diameter  of  right  piston  rod,  in 

Diameter  of  left  piston  rod,  in 

Length  of  stroke,  in 

Engine  horse  power  constant,  right,  crank  end  ... 
Engine  horse  power  constant,  right,  head  end  . . . 
Engine  horse  power  constant,  left,  crank  end  .... 

Engine  horse  power  constant,  left,  head  end  

Greatest  travel  of  valve,  in 

Outside  lap  of  valve,  in 

Exhaust  lap,  in 

Lead,  in 

Nominal  boiler  pressure,  lb.  per  sq.  in 

Diameter  of  boiler  at  first  ring,  in 

Number  of  boiler  fire  tubes  

Diameter  of  fire  tubes,  in 

Length  of  fire  tubes,  ft 

Heating  surface  (fire  tubes),  sq.  ft 

Heating  surface  (fire  box),  sq.  ft 

Heating  surface  (water  tubes),  sq.  ft 

Heating  surface  (total),  sq.  ft 

Grate  area,  sq.  ft 

Diameter  of  exhaust  nozzle,  in 


C.  & N.  W. 
. . American 

B-3 

258 

78,000 

50,000 

28,000 

13,650 


. .59.64 
. . 17  rs 
. .16  ft 
■ . .2  ff 

2'» 

24 

0.01411 

0.01446 

0.01336 

0.01370 

5 

Vs 

. . . . . A 
o 

135 

50 

151 

2 

. .11.67 
. .835.0 
. .119.8 
. . 9.8 

. .964.6 
. . 17.5 
. .3.625 


14 


View  of  C.  & N.  W.  Locomotive  No.  258  in  Testing  Position,  and  Testing  Crew. 


15 


THE  TEST  LOCOMOTIVE 

The  locomotive  used  for  all  test  runs  was  provided  by  the  Chicago 
& Northwestern  Railway  Company  in  1914,  an  American  type  engine 
which  until  that  time  had  been  used  in  both  passenger  and  freight 
service  on  one  of  the  Dakota  divisions.  It  had  received  a light  over- 
hauling just  before  coming  to  the  College,  and  was  therefore  in  fairly 
good  repair.  A photographic  view  of  the  locomotive  is  shown  in 
Fig.  5.  Table  II  contains  dimensions  and  other  data  concerning  it. 

MEASURING  INSTRUMENTS 

Sargent  laboratory  thermometers  were  used  for  taking  all  tempera- 
tures except  that  in  the  smoke  box.  Special  pyrometers  were  em- 
ployed for  determining  the  smoke  box  temperatures.  (See  item  13, 
page  20.) 

The  Orsat  apparatus  was  used  for  analyzing  flue  gas.  This 
apparatus  has  three  absorption  pipettes  : the  first  contains  a solution 
of  caustic  potash  and  absorbs  C02 ; the  second  contains  a solution  of 
caustic  potash  and  pyrogallic  acid  and  absorbs  oxygen ; and  the  third 
contains  a solution  of  cuprous  chloride  and  absorbs  CO. 

The  Parr  bomb  calorimeter  was  employed  for  determining  the 
B.t.u.  content  of  the  coals. 

Indicator  cards  were  taken  with  Crosby  outside  spring  indicators 
equipped  with  120-pound  springs  and  continuous  drum  attachments. 

The  dome  steam  gage,  pyrometers,  coal  and  water  scales,  brake 
dynamometers,  revolution  counters,  and  indicator  springs  were 
checked  or  calibrated  especially  for  the  test  runs. 

The  more  simple  instruments  not  mentioned  above  are  described 
in  the  detailed  results  of  the  test  runs. 

COALS  TESTED 

Only  two  types  of  coal  were  tested  during  this  investigation.  Both 
coals  are  being  burned  in  Chicago  & Northwestern  locomotives  in 
regular  service;  one  is  an  Iowa  coal  from  Buxton  mine  No.  18,  Monroe 
County ; the  other  is  an  Illinois  coal  from  the  Benld  mine,  Macoupin 
County. 

Runs  1 to  7 were  made  with  a car  (No.  1)  of  the  Illinois  coal ; Runs 
8 to  11  and  Run  18  with  a car  (No.  2)  of  the  Iowa  coal;  and  Runs  19 
to  22  with  a second  car  (No.  3)  of  the  Iowa  coal.  The  coal  in  all 
three  cars  was  of  lump  size,  though  some  of  the  larger  lumps  were 
broken  up  just  before  firing.  The  average  size  of  the  Iowa  coal,  Cars 
Nos.  2 and  3,  was  somewhat  larger  than  that  of  the  Illinois  coal,  and 
contained  a less  amount  of  fine  material. 

Although  rain  fell  during  the  latter  part  of  Run  9,  it  added  very 
little  moisture  to  the  coal  burned  in  that  run.  Coal  for  Run  11,  how- 
ever, contained  some  moisture  from  the  rain. 


16 


TABLE  III 

ANALYSES  OF  COALS  BY  CAR  LOADS 


Name  of  coal 

County 

Mine 

Car  No 

Nos.  of  test  runs 

Illinois 

Macoupin 

Benld 

1-7 

Iowa 
Monroe 
Buxton  No.  18 
2 

8-11,  18 

Iowa 
Monroe 
Buxton  No.  18 
3 

19-22 

Average  proximate  analysis,  coal  as  received 

Moisture,  per  cent 

13.4 

16.2 

15.6 

Volatile  matter,  per  cent 

33.9  | 

33.3 

33.0 

Fixed  carbon,  per  cent 

37.8 

34.9 

37.6 

Ash,  per  cent 

14.9 

15.6 

13.8 

Total,  per  cent . 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Sulfur,  per  cent 

4.8 

5.5 

4.3 

Average  B.  t.  u.  per  pound 


As  received 

10,030 

9,350 

9,930 

Moisture  free 

11,580 

11,160 

11,760 

Combustible 

14,000 

13,700 

14,060 

TABLE  IV 

MOISTURE  CONTENT  AND  HEAT  UNITS  IN  COAL  BY  TEST  RUNS 


Name  of  Coal 

Mine 

Car  No. 

Run  No. 

Coal  as  Received 

Moisture, 

% 

B.  t.  u. 

1 per  pound 

Illinois 

Benld, 

1 

1 

14.9 

9,860 

Macoupin 

2 

13.8 

9,980 

County 

3 

13.8 

9,980 

4 

13.0 

10,080 

5 

13.0 

10,080 

6 

12.6 

10,110 

7 

12.6 

10,110 

Iowa 

Buxton 

2 

8 

17.1 

9,250 

No.  18, 

9 

17.1 

9,250 

Monroe 

11 

16.3 

9,340 

County 

18 

14.4 

9,550 

Iowa 

Buxton 

19 

16.7 

9,800 

No.  18, 

20 

16.7 

9,800 

Monroe 

j 3 

21 

14.4 

10,070 

County 

22 

14.4 

10,070 

A small  representative  sample  of  coal  was  chosen  from  each  cart 
load  as  it  was  weighed  for  firing.  If  but  one  run  on  a certain  car  of 
coal  was  made  in  a day,  the  total  sample  from  each  run  was  broken  up, 
mixed,  and  quartered,  and  a small  portion  kept  for  analysis.  If  two 
runs  were  made  in  one  day  on  a certain  car  load,  samples  from  both 
runs  were  mixed  together,  broken  up,  and  quartered  for  the  sample 
for  analysis. 

The  percentage  of  moisture  was  determined  on  each  analysis 
sample  so  obtained.  Then  all  samples  from  one  car  load  of  coal  were 
mixed  together  and  this  composite  sample  was  analyzed  for  volatile 
matter,  fixed  carbon,  ash,  sulfur,  and  heat  units.  The  results  of  these 


17 


analyses  appear  in  Tables  III  and  IV.  In  Table  III  the  percentage  of 
moisture  is  based  upon  determinations  for  the  separate  days;  all  other 
items  are  based  upon  analyses  of  composite  samples.  Table  IV  gives 
the  moisture  content  for  runs  made  on  separate  days,  as  well  as  the 
B.t.u.  content  per  pound  as  received.  Corrected  for  moisture  in  the 
corresponding  samples. 

TABLE  V 

ANALYSES  OF  ASH  AND  REFUSE 


N ame  of 
Coal 

! 

Mine 

Car 

No. 

Run 

No. 

As  Received 

Moisture 

Free 

Total  Pounds 
From  Test  Run 

Moisture 

% 

Carbon 

% 

Carbon 

% 

Ash  and 
Refuse 

Carbo  n 

Illinois 

Benld, 

1 

1 

7.3 

19.2 

20.6 

245 

47 

Macoupin 

2 

3.8 

16.1 

16.7 

254 

41 

County 

3 

3.8 

16.1 

16.7 

272 

44 

4 

3.6 

17.8 

18.4 

407 

72 

5 

3.6 

17.8 

18.4 

378 

67 

6 

2.7 

16.6 

17.1 

343 

57 

7 

2.7 

16.6 

17.1 

347 

58 

Iowa 

Buxton 

2 

8 

4.2 

26.5 

27.7 

1 258 

68 

No.  18, 

9 

4.2 

26.5 

27.7 

465 

123 

! Monroe 

11 

1 .4 

13.8 

14.0 

315 

43 

County 

18 

1 .0 

20.7 

20.9 

210 

43 

Iowa 

Buxton 

3 

19 

0.6 

23.0 

23.2 

225 

52 

No.  18, 

20 

0.6 

23.0 

23.2 

220 

51 

Monroe 

21 

4.0 

26.1 

27.2 

160 

42 

County 

22 

4.0 

26.1 

27.2 

225 

59 

In  Table  V will  be  found  the  carbon  content  and  other  data  per- 
taining to  the  ash  and  refuse. 

NOTES  ON  CONDITIONS  DURING  TEST  RUNS 

In  order  to  secure  representative  averages  and  to  determine  the 
reliability  of  individual  runs  as  compared  with  the  corresponding  aver- 
age, a considerable  number  of  test  runs  were  made  on  each  coal  under 
the  same  prescribed  conditions.  Steam  pressure,  cut-off,  speed,  and 
draw-bar  pull  were  kept  as  nearly  as  possible  the  same  for  all  runs. 
During  the  preliminary  work  it  was  decided  to  set  the  reverse  lever  8 
notches  ahead  of  center  position.  The  throttle  opening  was  adjusted 
until  a suitable  speed  was  attained,  after  which  the  position  of  the 
throttle  lever  was  marked.  Each  engineer-fireman  was  then  instructed 
to  keep  the  reverse  and  throttle  levers  in  these  same  positions  for  all 
runs.  Also  the  man  at  each  brake  regulated  the  water  pressure  on  his 
brake  wheel  so  as  to  hold  the  brake  dynamometer  pointer  as  constant 
as  possible  on  1,500  pounds  during  all  runs. 

In  all,  22  test  runs  were  made,  but  7 of  these  are  not  included  in 
the  report.  The  furnace  and  boiler  were  not  in  condition  to  give 
normal  results  during  Runs  12  to  17.  Run  10  is  also  omitted  because 
efficiencies  calculated  from  readings  during  this  run  were  so  high  as 
to  indicate  a possible  error  in  the  weight  records. 


18 


FIG.  6. 

Rear  of  Testing  Laboratory.  Valve  control  pit  is  shown  in  the  center  back- 
ground. 


Since  the  engineer-fireman  who  served  for  Runs  1 to  11  could  not 
be  retained  after  Run  11,  Runs  18  to  22  were  made  with  another  fire- 
man. This  fact  makes  a direct  comparison  between  certain  runs 
somewhat  unreliable  because  of  different  methods  of  firing  used  by 
different  firemen. 

The  engineer-fireman  was  in  each  case  a locomotive  engineer  and 
an  employee  of  the  Chicago  & Northwestern  Railway,  and  he  was 
allowed  to  follow  his  own  system  of  firing.  During  Runs  1 to  11  coal 
was  usually  fired  one  shovelful  at  a time,  about  seven  shovels  in 
five  minutes.  The  average  weight  per  shovel  was  then  about  twenty- 
five  pounds.  During  Runs  18  to  22  coal  was  usually  fired  two,  three 
or  four  shovelfuls  at  a time,  but  the  average  weight  per  shovel  was 
less  than  during  Runs  1 to  11. 

Since  the  locomotive  had  been  working  satisfactorily  before  Run  1 
was  started,  the  furnace  and  boiler  parts  were  not  especially  cleaned 
for  that  run. 

The  diaphragm  plate  was  removed  from  the  smoke  box  just  before 
Run  2. 

The  boiler  flues  were  cleaned  between  Runs  5 and  6;  it  was  noted 
that  the  seven  bottom  flues  were  dirty. 

The  back  flue  sheet  and  flues  were  cleaned  just  before  Run  18,  and 
a new  furnace  arch  of  foundry  brick  was  built. 


19 


The  back  flue  sheet  was  cleaned  of  “honey-comb”  and  the  arch  was 
replaced  with  Chicago  & Northwestern  brick  between  Runs  18  and  19. 

The  back  flue  sheet  was  examined  and  found  to  be  reasonably  clean 
after  Run  21  and  was  not  cleaned  again. 

The  front  ash  pan  damper  was  closed  some  of  the  time  and  was 
partly  open  some  of  the  time  during  the  various  runs.  Its  relative 
opening  is  shown  roughly  by  the  ash  pan  draft,  item  6,  Table  VI. 

As  no  provision  has  yet  been  made  to  determine  the  loss  by  sparks 
and  cinders  that  go  through  the  stack,  the  smoke  and  exhaust  steam 
were  discharged  directly  into  a pipe  through  the  roof. 

From  the  College  mains  the  boiler  feed  water  was  run  into  the 
weighing  tanks,  and  then  into  the  feed  water  reservoir.  As  the  water 
used  was  very  hard,  regulation  quantities  Of  soda  ash  were  added  to 
each  tank  of  water. 

DETAILED  RESULTS  OF  TESTS 

Basic  Averages  and  Totals  from  Readings.  The  chief  observer  and 
his  assistant  each  carried,  during  the  run,  a special  typewritten  data 
blank,  made  up  for  the  log  of  test  readings.  These  two  observers  took 
all  routine  original  readings  except  on  weight  of  coal,  weight  of  feed 
water,  temperature  of  feed  water,  flue  gas  analysis,  and  coal  and  ash 
analysis ; these  latter  readings  were  taken  by  men  who  performed  the 
corresponding  details  of  the  work,  and  who  later  reported  to  the 
chief  observer. 

Most  routine  readings  were  taken  at  10-minute  intervals  during 
the  test  runs ; coal  and  feed  water  were  weighed  out  as  required,  and 
indicator  cards  and  flue  gas  analyses  were  generally  made  at  20- 
minute  intervals. 

Following  are  descriptions  of  readings  with  item  numbers  corre- 
sponding to  those  in  Tables  VI,  IX  and  X. 

Item  4.  Boiler  Gage  Pressure : Read  from  the  cab  gage  (uncali- 
brated) and  from  a calibrated  gage  on  the  dome.  The  latter  reading  is 
used  in  the  calculations. 

Item  5.  Barometer:  Reading  taken  at  noon  from  a mercury  barome- 
ter in  the  College  Steam  and  Gas  Laboratory  Building  and  used  for  all 
runs  during  the  day, 

Item  6.  Ash  Pan  Draft:  Read  on  an  Ellison  differential  draft  gage. 

Item  7.  Smoke  Box  Draft:  Read  on  a water  “U”  tube  gage 
connected  to  the  smoke  box  back  of  the  diaphragm. 

Item  8.  Smoke  Box  Draft,  Front:  Read  on  a water  “U”  tube  gage 
connected  to  the  smoke  box  ahead  of  the  diaphragm. 

Item  p and  10.  Temperatures  of  Outdoor  and  Engine  Room  Air: 
Taken  from  laboratory  thermometers  hung  in  the  shade  outside  and 
inside  the  building. 

Item  11.  Temperature  of  Feed  Water:  Taken  from  a laboratory 
thermometer  hung  in  the  feed  water  reservoir. 


20 


Item  12.  Temperature  in  Dome  Calorimeter:  Taken  from  a labora- 
tory thermometer  set  in  the  oil  well  of  an  externally  lagged  throttling  cal- 
orimeter connected  to  the  steam  dome. 

Item  13.  Temperature  in  Smoke  Box:  Taken  from  an  expanding  stem 
Tagliabue  pyrometer  checked  by  readings  from  a Brown  electric  record- 
ing  pyrometer.  The  stem  of  the  Tagliabue  pyrometer  and  the  thermo- 
couple of  the  Brown  pyrometer  were  both  inserted  to  measure  the  tempera- 
ture at  about  the  center  of  the  smoke  box,  ahead  of  the  diaphragm. 

Items  14,  13  and  16.  Flue  Gas  Analysis:  Made  by  the  Chemical  Sec- 
tion of  the  Engineering  Experiment  Station  by  means  of  an  Orsat  ap- 
paratus. Each  sample  of  gas  was  drawn  from  a sample  tube  inserted  in 
the  lower  front  part  of  the  smoke  box.  The  first  part  of  the  sample  was 
wasted  in  order  to  eliminate  fresh  air  and  unrepresentative  gases  which 
might  have  collected  in  the  sample  tube. 

Item  17.  Pounds  of  Coal:  The  coal  was  weighed  out  by  cart  loads 
on  platform  scales  before  being  dumped  on  firing  platform.  At  the  start 
of  the  run  the  condition  of  the  fire  was  noted  and  firing  of  weighed  coal 
was  begun.  Firing  was  conducted  so  as  to  have  the  fire  box  contain  at  the 
end  of  the  run  approximately  the  same  amount  of  unconsumed  fuel  as  at 
the  start.  The  weight  of  any  weighed  but  unfired  coal  at  the  end  of  the 
run  was  deducted  from  the  total  net  weights. 

Item  18.  Pounds  of  Feed  Water:  The  feed  water  was  weighed  out 
in  two  stationary  tanks,  each  resting  on  platform  scales,  before  being 
dumped  into  the  feed  water  reservoir.  At  the  beginning  of  run  the  water 
levels  in  locomotive  boiler  and  in  feed  water  reservoir  were  noted.  The 
boiler  water  was  brought  up  to  its  original  level  at  the  end  of  the  run, 
after  which  enough  water  was  let  out  of  one  of  the  weighing  tanks  to 
bring  the  water  in  the  feed  water  reservoir  up  to  the  same  level  as  at  the 
beginning  of  the  run.  Overflow  from  the  boiler  injector  was  caught  and 
its  weight  was  deducted  from  the  weighed  pounds  of  feed  water. 

Item  19.  Total  Pounds  Ash  and  Refuse:  The  ash  and  refuse  were 
weighed  on  platform  scales.  Just  before  the  start  of  run,  the  fire  was 
shaken  down,  after  which  the  ash  pan  was  cleaned.  At  the  end  of  the 
run  the  fire  was  shaken  down  to  represent,  approximately,  conditions  at 
the  start  of  the  run.  The  net  weight  of  ash  and  refuse  passed  through 
the  grates  after  the  beginning  of  the  run  was  then  recorded.  These 
weights  varied  much  among  individual  runs,  partly  because  of  the  lack 
of  uniformity  in  treating  the  fire  and  partly  because  of  the  difficulty  of 
shaking  down  representative  amounts  during  and  at  the  end  of  the  run. 

Items  20  to  23.  Brake  Loads : Measured  by  Kohlbusch  spring  dyna- 
mometers, one  attached  to  each  brake.  All  dynamometers  were  calibrated 
before  the  test  runs  and  were  read  to  the  nearest  10  pounds  during  the 
tests. 

Item  24.  Total  Brake  Load:  Is  the  sum  of  the  values  of  items  20  to 
23,  and  represents  the  total  pull  of  all  brakes  at  the  radius  of  application 
of  the  dynamometers.  This  radius  was  the  same  for  all  brakes.  See 
Table  1. ' 


21 


Item  23.  Driver  r.  p.  m.:  Calculated  from  readings  from  a revolu- 
tion counter  attached  permanently  to  motion  from  the  right  hand  engine 
cross  head. 

Item  26.  Brake  r.  p.  m. : Calculated  from  readings  from  a revolution 
counter  attached  permanently  to  the  axle  of  the  left  front  support  wheel. 

There  were  times  when  either  the  driver  or  brake  revolution  counter 
was  not  working.  For  such  times,  both  speeds  were  calculated  from  read- 
ings from  the  counter  which  was  working  properly.  When  both  coun- 
ters were  working  properly,  the  ratio  of  the  two  speeds  was  found  to 
be  quite  constant.  A hand  speed-indicator  was  also  used  to  check  the 
revolution  counters. 

Calculated  Boiler  Data.  In  Tables  VII,  IX,  and  X,  items  27-73  all 
refer  to  boiler  and  furnace  results.  Conventional  formulas  and  con- 
stants were  employed  for  the  calculation  of  practically  all  of  these 
results.  Methods  of  calculating  the  more  simple  items  are  indicated 
by  the  titles.  Other  items  are  explained  as  follows : 

Items  28,  29,  31,  32,  34  and  33,  pounds  of  coal  per  hour  per  square 
foot  of  grate  and  per  square  foot  of  heating  surface , are  based  upon 
dimensions  given  in  Table  II. 

Item  30,  pounds  of  dry  coal  per  hour,  has  the  same  value  as  item  27, 
with  deduction  for  moisture  according  to  Table  IV. 

Item  33,  pounds  of  combustible  coal  per  hour,  has  the  same  value  as 
item  27,  with  deduction  for  moisture  and  ash  according  to  Tables  III  and 

IV. 

Items  36,  39,  40  and  48,  all  give  B.t.u.  in  thousands.  To  get  the  actual 
value  of  any  of  these  respective  items,  multiply  the  value. given  by  1,000. 

Item  3 7,  pounds  combustible  “consumed”  per  hour,  has  the  same  value 
as  item  33,  minus  pounds  of  carbon  in  ash  and  refuse  according  to  Table 

V. 

Item  39,  B.t.u.  in  ash  and  refuse,  is  arrived  at  by  assuming  14,500 
B.t.u.  per  pound  of  carbon  in  ash  and  refuse. 

Item  40,  B.t.u.  in  combustible  “consumed”  per  hour,  is  equal  to  the 
value  of  item  36  minus  the  value  of  item  39. 

Item  41,  pounds  supplied  boiler  per  hour,  is  the  net  weight  of  boiler 
feed  water. 

Item  42,  quality  of  steam,  is  calculated  from  the  following  formula: 
x=  H — Q + 0.48  (T'  — T)  . 

x = quality  of  steam. 

Q = heat  of  the  liquid  at  boiler  pressure. 

L = latent  heat  of  evaporation  at  boiler  pressure. 

H = total  heat  in  steam  at  calorimetric  or  atmospheric  pressure. 

0.48  = specific  heat  of  superheated  steam. 

T'  = temperature  in  calorimeter. 

T = temperature  of  evaporation  at  calorimetric  or  atmospheric  pres- 
sure. 

Pound-Fahrenheit  units  only  are  involved  in  the  above  formula. 


22 


Item  43,  moisture  in  steam,  is  equal  to  100%  minus  the  value  of  item 
42. 

Item  44,  pounds  dry  steam  per  hour,  has  the  same  value  as  item  41, 
minus  moisture  as  computed  from  item  43. 

Item  43,  factor  of  evaporation,  is  figured  by  the  following  formula : 

H—  (t  — 32). 

Fe= l 

Fe  = factor  of  evaporation. 

H = total  heat  in  steam  at  boiler  pressure. 

t = temperature  of  boiler  feed  water. 

L = 970.4,  latent  heat  of  evaporation  at  2120  F. 

Pound-Fahrenheit  units  only  are  involved  in  the  above  formula. 

Item  46,  pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  2120  F.  per 
hour,  is  equal  to  item  44  times  item  45. 

Item  4 7,  equivalent  evaporation  per  hour  per  square  foot  of  heating 
surface,  is  based  upon  the  total  heating  surface  as  given  in  Table  II. 

Item  48,  B.t.u.  absorbed  per  hour  by  dry  steam,  is  equal  to  the  value  of 
item  46  times  970.4. 

Item  60 , boiler  efficiency,  is  equal  to  item  48  divided  by  item  40. 

Item  61,  boiler  and  grate  efficiency,  is  equal  to  item  48  divided  by 
item  36. 

Item  62,  boiler  horse  power  developed,  is  equal  to  the  value  of  item  46 
divided  by  34.5. 

Item  63,  total  per  cent  of  CO 2,  0 and  CO,  is  the  sum  of  the  values  of 
items  14,  15  and  16.  All  these  percentages  are  used  in  terms  of  volumes. 

Item  64,  per  cent  of  nitrogen,  is  equal  to  100%  minus  the  value  of 
item  63. 

Item  63,  ratio  of  oxygen  supplied  to  that  used,  is  derived  from  the 
following  formula : 

N 

N — (3.8  X O) 

r ==  ratio. 

N = per  cent  of  nitrogen  (item  64). 

O — per  cent  of  oxygen  (item  15). 

3.8  = ratio  of  nitrogen  to  oxygen  by  volume  in  fresh  air. 

Item  66,  pounds  of  air  per  pound  carbon,  is  equal  to  the  value  of  item 
65  times  11. 6.  The  factor,  11.6,  is  the  approximate  number  of  pounds  of 
fresh  air  required  to  burn  one  pound  of  carbon.  The  same  excess  of  air 
is  assumed  for  all  combustible  elements  in  the  fuel. 

Items  63-33,  boiler  balance  sheet,  show  by  approximate  percentages 
what  disposition  is  made  of  the  heat  units  originally  contained  in  the  coal 
fired. 

Item  63,  heating  and  evaporating  water,  is  the  boiler  and  grate  effi- 
ciency (item  61). 

Item  68,  heat  lost  in  flue  gases,  is  calculated  by  the  following  formula : 
Hf  = G X (Tg  — Ta)  X 0.24  X (100%. — La)  -f-  14,500. 

Hf  = percentage  of  heat  in  carbon  carried  out  by  the  gases. 


23 


G = pounds  of  gas  per  pound  carbon,  or  the  value  of  item  66  plus  i 
pound. 

Tg  = temperature  (°F)  of  flue  gases  (item  13). 

Ta  = temperature  (°F)  of  engine  room  air  (item  10). 

La  = per  cent  of  loss  in  ash  and  refuse  (item  71). 

0.24  = specific  heat  of  gases. 

14,500  = B.t.u.  per  pound  of  carbon. 

The  formula  used  for  item  68  is  adapted  from  the  general  method  used 
by  Kent,  Gebhardt,  and  other  authorities.  Their  method  is  based  upon  an 
ultimate  analysis  of  the  fuel  and  calculates  the  heat  carried  out  by  excess 
air  and  by  gases  resulting  from  combustion  of  carbon  and  hydrogen. 

While  the  value  of  item  68  is  reported  as  applying  in  general  to  all 
stack  gases,  the  method  of  calculation  is  correct  only  as  applied  to  air 
allowed  for  burning  carbon  and  to  products  of  this  combustion.  Its  value 
is  higher  than  the  percentage  of  heat  actually  carried  out  by  dry  gases, 
but  lower  than  would  have  been  obtained  by  a computation  based  upon  an 
ultimate  fuel  analysis.  Such  a computation  would  have  added  the  per- 
centage of  heat  carried  out  by  the  water  of  combustion  from  hydrogen. 

Item  69,  heat  lost  by  moisture  in  coal,  is  calculated  by  the  following 
formula : 


Hm=M  Xq-f-h. 

Hm  = heat  lost  by  moisture. 

M = percentage  of  moisture  in  coal  as  fired, 
h = B.t.u.  per  pound  of  coal  as  fired. 

q = B.t.u.  loss  per  pound  of  moisture  in  coal  = (212  — Ta)  -j- 970.4 
+ 0.48  (Tg  — 21 2). 

Ta  = temperature  (°F)  of  engine  room  air  (item  10). 

970.4  = latent  heat  of  vaporization  at  2120  F. 

0.48  = specific  heat  of  superheated  steam. 

Tg  = temperature  (°F)  of  flue  gases  (item  13). 

Item  70,  heat  lost  in  CO,  is  calculated  by  the  following  formula: 


co  C02  + CO  ^ 14,500 
Hco  = heat  lost  in  CO. 

CO  = percentage  of  CO  (item  16). 

C02  = percentage  of  C02  (item  14). 

10,150  = B.t.u.  lost  by  one  pound  of  carbon  burning  to. CO  instead  of 
to  C02. 

14,500  = B.t.u.  per  pound  of  carbon,  burning  to  C02. 

The  value  of  item  70,  refers  actually  only  to  the  carbon  in  the  fuel, 
but  since  no  ultimate  fuel  analysis  was  available  and  since  the  difference 
is  slight,  the  value  is  reported  as  referred  to  all  combustible  in  the  fuel. 


Item  71,  heat  lost  in  ash  and  refuse,  is  equal  to  item  39  divided  by 
item  36. 

Item  72,  heat  lost  and  unaccounted  for,  is  equal  to  100%  minus  the 
sum  of  the  values  of  items  67  to  71. 


BY  INDIVIDUAL  TEST  RUNS 


24 


Item 

No. 

CONOO 

05  o 1-H  CM  CO 

17 

18 

19 

CO 

22 

4-1 

2.50 

126.90 

29.07 

Oil 

4.30 

7.60 

ssssg 

11.4 

6.5 

0.0 

5,160 

27,085 

225 

1,482 

1,535 

1,567 

1,647 

6,231 

90.8 

104.0 

O 

21 

4-1 

2.50 

126.80 

29.08 

OWN 

50 

58 

51 

264 

770 

0 0 

f 9 

Z U 

4,855 

26,113 

160 

1,488 

1,546 

1,546 

1,663 

6,243 

89.8 

102.8 

1 

20 

3-31 

2.50 

127.70 

29.07 

0.14 

3.90 

6.90 

49 

59 

51 

261 

769 

12.0 

4.9 

0.1 

4,856 

26,022 

220 

1,493 

1,535 

1,546 

1,653 

6,227 

90.0 

103.1 

19 

3-31 

2.50 

126.70 

29.10 

0.17 

3.40 

6.50 

45 

61 

55 

264 

760 

CiOH 

© co  o 

4,463 

25,567 

225 

1,496 

1,542 

1,550 

1,624 

6,212 

89.3 

102.3 

CM 

O* 

18 

3-30 

2.50 

129.50 

29.10 

0.13 

4.60 

8.60 

N-  CO  ^ N»  rf 

CM  kO  O 

5,540 

31,346 

210 

1,500 

1,508 

1,550 

1,638 

6,196 

95.8 

109.7 

S 

11 

3-25 

2.50 

126.10 

28.83 

0.06 

4.80 

7.40 

40 

56 

51 

258 

795 

OICO 

5,155 

27,027 

315 

§lj§g§ 

88.4 

101.4 

1 

*.s 

*3« 

126.10 

28.64 

0.07 

3.90 

7.10 

62 

74 

52 

267 

788 

CO  CM 

O CO  o 

5,398 

29,113 

465 

l|s|| 

93.5 

107.1 

8 

3-24 

2.50 

126.60 

28.62 

0.08 

3.40 

6.80 

^ CO  CM 

OO  00  O 

5,337 

26,401 

258 

1,514 

1,560 

1,547 

1,731 

6,352 

94.8 

108.6 

7 

3-23 

2.50 

125.80 

28.86 

0.08 

4.20 

7.00 

45 

59 

51 

265 

788 

05  CO  CM 

O5t^o 

5,118 

27,226; 

347 

§!!!!. 

92.9 

106.3 

6 

3-23 

2.50 

129.00 

28.98 

0.07 

3.90 

7.10 

35 

54 

51 

261 

783 

ro 

YL 

66 

5,558 

27,894 

343 

1,494 

1,519 

1,575 

1,687 

6,275 

co  oo 

o 

55 

5 

3-22 

2.50 

125.90 

29.10 

0.08 

4.20 

7.70 

33 

54 

49 

259 

820 

N-  N»  CM 

HlOO 

11s 

“i8 

mm 

97.1 

111.3 

4 

3-22 

2.50 

133.20 

28.97 

0.08 

4.20 

8.40 

CO  ^ CM 

ONO 

6,433 

30,496 

407 

1,515 

1,579 

1,525 

1,712 

6,331 

98.9 

113.4 

i 

3 

3-21 

2.50 

130.90 

28.51 

o ^ oo 

ssssg 

9.1 

9.8 

0.2 

5,535 

28,341 

272 

1,518 

1,562 

1,551 

1,691 

6,322 

93.6 

107.2 

2 

3-21 

1.75 

§8 

0.18 

4.60 

8.10 

3SS|2 

12.0 
5.3  | 
0.1  1 

3,815 

20,995 

254 

1,514 

1,605 

1,540 

1,658 

6,317 

93.8 

107.4 

^CO<N 

121.50 

28.82 

0.21 

4.50 

7.40 

62 

75 

52 
263 
789  1 

’-H  GO  CO 

ONO 

5,182 

27,353 

245 

!?-!!! 

22  222  222  £8 


25 


Calculated  Engine  and  Brake  Data.  Items  74  to  102  in  Tables 
VIII,  IX,  and  X include  simple  averages  and  totals  calculated  from 
engine  and  brake  readings,  and  also  show  the  performance  of  engine 
as  referred  to  coal  and  steam  consumption. 

Items  74-77,  mean  effective  pressures,  were  determined  as  measured 
from  cards  by  a polar  planimeter. 

Items  78-81,  indicated  horse  powers,  are  calculated  from  the  formula: 

„ PLAN 

Hp.  = 

33, 000 

P = mean  effective  pressure,  lb.  per  sq.  in. 

L = length  of  stroke  in  feet. 

A = net  area  of  piston  in  square  inches. 

N = number  of  revolutions  per  minute. 

33,000  = foot-pounds  per  minute  per  horse  power. 

LA 

Values  of  engine  constants are  listed  in  Table  II  for  both  ends 

33,000 

of  both  cylinders. 

Items  89  arid  90,  speed  in  miles  per  hour  of  driver  and  support  wheels, 
are  derived  from  the  revolutions  per  minute  of  these  wheels  (items  25 
and  26)  and  the  perimeters  of  the  respective  wheels  according  to  dimen- 
sions given  in  Tables  I and  II. 

Item  91,  brake  horse  pozver,  is  equal  to  the  product  of  items  24  and  26 
multiplied  by  the  radius  of  brake  arm  in  feet  (Table  I),  and  by  2 X 3.1416, 
divided  by  33,000. 

Item  92,  estimated  draw-bar  pull,  is  calculated  by  multiplying  total 

52.12^ 

brake  load  (item  24)  by  the  ratio  *■-  - -,  and  dividing  by  96%. 

52.125  inches  is  twice  the  radius  of  the  brake  arms,  and  52.0  inches 
is  the  diameter  of  the  support  wheels.  It  is  assumed  that  4%  of  the 
energy  delivered  to  the  support  wheels  by  the  locomotive  drivers  is  lost 
in  bearing  friction  and  is  not  measured  through  the  brakes ; hence  the  di- 
visor of  96%  efficiency.  The  assumed  loss  of  4%  is  an  estimate  based 
upon  the  condition  of  the  bearings,  and  is  thought  to  be  sufficiently  high. 

Item  93,  estimated  dr  azo-bar  horse  power,  is  assumed  equal  to  brake 
horse  power  (item  91)  divided  by  96%  efficiency. 

Item  ioo,  thermal  efficiency  of  cylinders,  is  equal  to  total  indicated 
horse  power  (item  82)  times  2545,  divided  by  the  number  of  B.t.u.  ab- 
sorbed per  hour  by  dry  steam.  The  constant  2545,  is  the  B.t.u.  equivalent 
of  one  horse-power-hour. 

Item  1 oi,  machine  efficiency  of  locomotive,  is  equal  to  the  estimated 
draw-bar  horse  power  (item  93)  divided  by  the  total  indicated  horse 
power  (item  82). 

Item  102,  efficiency  from  coal  to  dr  azo-bar  pozver,  is  equal  to  draw-bar 
horse  power  (item  93)  times  2545,  divided  by  B.t.u.  in  coal  fired  (item 
36).  This  item  represents  the  percentage  of  heat  in  the  coal  fired  which 
is  turned  into  actual  tractive  energy. 


CALCULATED  RESULTS  OF  BOILER  TRIALS 
BY  INDIVIDUAL  TEST  RUNS 


26 


- 

30 

31 

32 

$338 

33333 

§ 

a 

2,064 

118.0 

2.14 

1,766 

100.9 

1.83 

1,480 

84.6 

1.53 

20,780 

1,457 

90 

330 

20,450 

10,830 

98.0 

2.0 

10,610 

1.210 

12,840 

13.31 

12,460 

7,050 

8,420 

CM 

1,942 

111.0 

2.01 

1,662 

95.0 

1.72 

1,392 

79.6 

1.44 

19,550 

1,375 

64 

250 

19,300 

10,450 

98.1 

1.9 

10,250 

1.209 

12,390 1 

12.85 

12,030 

7,240 1 

8,640 

a 

1,942 

111.0 

2.01 

1,617 

92.4 

1.68 

1,355 

77.5 

1.41 

19,030 

1,335 

88 

290 

18,740 

10,410 

97.9 

2.1 

10,190 

1.209 

12,320 

12.78 

11,960 

7,400 

8,830 

05 

1,785 

102.0 

1 85 

1,487 

85.0 

1.54 

1,246 

71.2 

1.29 

17,490 

1,225 

90 

300 

17.19C 

1 — 11 
oTo’h 

12,090 

12.54 

11,740 

7,890 

9,420 

oo 

3g- 

1,896 

108.4 

1.97 

1,544 

88.2 

1.60 

21,160 

1,527 

84 

250 

20,910 

S^il 

gS^gV; 

§ 

15.29 

14,310 

7,550 

9,270 

2,062 

117.8 

2.14 

1,725 

98.6 

1.79 

1,404 

80.2 

1.46 

19,260 

1,387 

126 

250 

19,010 

10,810 

2*3 

10,560 

1.208 

12,750 

13.22 

12,380 

7,180 

8,820 

05 

2,159 

123.3 

2.24 

1,790 

102.3 

1.86 

1,457 

83.3 

1.51 

19,960 

1,408 

186 

710 

19,250 

11,650 

98.3 

1.7 

11,450 

1.208 

13,830 

14.34 

13,420 

7,500 

9,210 

CO  o 

«‘a" 


g-»  I™"  gSssl  I— II  I s§ll 

es-H-1”®  o’fc'N©_:  N £2«®00 


"S' 


og  cm  oo  oo  io 

^OO  COO 


: n -h“§  ’ 


® o^o, 

IlSlI  1—§1  1 '5lli 

g"~  g s®ho'h  oi  Sg*-.’* 


sssis  §-- ii  § sin 

a-  Sf  5SwSh  3 53”^ 

iisl§  | ^11! 

a-  a'  s^"d-  3 


§°°s.  issss  i°°i§  1 §§ll 

s-g**  g-  g 5 s^®^* 


S’! 


Sid® 

S'§ei 

"gJW 


is- 


3 

»§§  I §Si 

5 Sa'- 


is-  !-i- 


CO  ® 

a-  _ -- 

“ IPH  1-r :g|  g *g|! 


2«r-*c 


JgooSo  ScoS 

Sgg- 


SSS|8  i-.||  1 asgi 

g‘~  g 


•m 

:| 

:p 

•o 

ii 

gl 

s» 

:h 

; Ph 

II 

tj 

:W 

;3 

oo 

*3  o 

mm 

mm 

:q 

sst 

' < 

!£  a s 

n 

m 

lij 

11111 

1 1* 

go, 

o o 

mm 

ss 

zi 


■a  ;§=°g&8-8j 

HU  1 

113111 


-'lllpipi 

= ^.ts€g||p33; 

« £ oX  pq  CQ  £ 0’S  & £ W m me 


h ass  %%£  %&%%%  ssssss 


2? 


28 


22 

61 

59 

63 

62 

78 

77 

76 

77 

308 

6.70 

5.73 

67,400 

35.2 

34.5 

40,500 

16.11 

16.09 

268.0 

6.505 

279.2 

7.39 

6.33 

38.8 

38.0 

74,400 

44,600 

6.28 

90.6 

3.42 

21 

62 

61 

65 

63 

79 

79 

78 

78 

314 

6.19 

5.29 

62.300 

33.3 

32.6 

38.300 

15.94 

15.91 

265.6 

6.520 

276.7 

7.02 

6.01 

37.8 

37.1 

70,700 

43,500 

6.64 

88.1 

3.60 

20 

61 

60 

65 

63 

77 

78 

78 

78 

311 

6.25 

5.20 

61,200 

33.5 

32.8 

38,500 

15.97 

15.95 

265.5 

6 500 

276.6 

7.02 

5.85 

37.7 

36.9 

68,800 

43,300 

6.61 

88.9 

3.70 

19 

61 

62 

64 

61 

77 

80 

76 

75 

308 

5.80 

4.83 

56,800 

33.2 

32.6 

38,100 

15.85 

15.83 

262.9 

6,485 

273.9 

6.52 

5.43 

37.3 

36.6 

63.900 

42.900 

6.68 

88.9 

3.98 

18 

60 

62 

65 

62 

81 

86 

83 

81 

331 

6.70 

5.73 

63,900 

37.9 

37.0 

43,200 

17.00 

16.97 

281.0  j 

6 470 

292.8 

7.57 

6.48 

42.8 

41.8 

72,300 

48,900 

5.89 

88.4 

3.52 

11 

58 

60 

68 

66 

72 

77 

80 

80 

309 

6.68 

5.58 

62,300 

35.0 

34.2 

40.100 

15.69 

15.69 

263.9 

6,570 

274.9 

7.51 

6.28 

39.4 

38.4 

70.100 

45.100 

6.35 

88.9 

3.63 

9 

58 

58 

66 

65 

76 

78 

82 

83 

319 

6.77 

5.61 

62,600 

36.5 

35.9 

42,100 

16.60 

16.57 

278.0 

6 550 

289.6 

7.46 

6.18 

40.2 

39.5 

68,900 

46,400 

6.05 

90.8 

3.69 

;88§ 


ggS-H^I  s§ 

“’“’S'ssss  ss 


*"  ®§®«  OO  S 00  O0  |3 


8§i  — I 

®«sSSgs  S2 


“>  8888 


fcS 


:il«^g  sa 

:«SSSS§  22 


CO  CO  gj 

34.6 
33.9 

39.800 

17.55 

17.551 

297.0 

6,610 

309.4 

8.32 

7.24 

39.4 

38.6 

83.800 
45,400 

6.40 

87.6 

3.04 

3 

54 

59 

73 

76 

71 

80 

91 

98 

340 

6.51 
5.61 
65  non 

33.3 

32.7 
38,400 

16.61 

16.59 

280.5 

6,600 

292.0 

7.58 

6.53 

38.8 
38.1 

75.700 

44.700 

6.63 

85.9 
3.36 

:ggg 


SSS£83 


ssl^®!  ^ 


«§-H  28^oo||  2„S3 

|«*|  ^ssjti 

235  aa.^gg  a-a 

S«8  l'«S5S5s3  eog§c° 

5<8c<i<m§§  8 8 

15*  ■“r 

>©  88t^oog§  Eco8 

^8  ^StsgJ*  °£~ 


« 88; 


f2888! 


• 8ooo8  8S 

iisaj  22 


IN  2 'S' © <M  © § S3  00  2 

?l  ^“'ssgfS-  ®r 


8oo  8^oc^88  §3©^ 

<m  -^  ■ • • • • r-  os  • • t* 

S®g  '-'“SSgJg  ®oom 


if:? 


!£££  KSgsSS  S3S£g&28  88  S88  888^88  8S8 


I 


29 


Notes  on  Individual  Results.  It  should  be  noted  that  thruout 
calculations  for  results  in  Tables  VII  to  X,  the  steam  is  given  no 
credit  for  heat  of  the  liquid,  or  moisture  in  steam  in  the  dome.  This 
small  quantity  of  heat  is  included  in  heat  lost  and  unaccounted  for 
(item  72)  in  the  boiler  heat  balance. 

Each  test  run  was  of  2.5  hours  duration,  except  No.  2 which  lasted 
but  1.75  hours. 

Average  boiler  gage  pressure  for  the  15  runs  reported  varied  from 
121.5  to  133.2  lb.  per  sq.  in.  Except  for  three  runs  all  average  pressures 
were  between  125  and  130. 

Considerable  percentage  of  variation  is  noted  in  the  ash  pan  draft ; 
this  is  due  to  different  openings  of  the  front  ash  pan  damper. 

Analyses  of  flue  gas  are  not  very  constant  in  values  between  suc- 
cessive runs.  Part  of  this  variation  is  thought  to  be  due  to  difficulty 
in  securing  average  samples  of  gas.  A sample  taken  just  after  firing 
is  likely  to  show  less  oxygen  than  one  taken  just  before  firing  when 
less  smoke  is  present. 

During  Runs  19  to  22,  the  fireman  was  watching-  results  of  gas 
analysis  and  regulated  his  firing  in  an  attempt  to  cut  down  the  per- 
centage of  CO. 

The  differences  between  total  weights  of  ash  and  refuse  is  so  great 
in  some  cases  as  to  appear  inconsistent.  This  is  thought  to  be  due  to 
the  difficulty  of  shaking  down  a representative  amount  of  ash  during 
and  at  the  end  of  a run. 

The  load  on  the  left  front  brake  is  reported  higher  than  the  load 
on  any  other  brake  during  all  runs.  This  is  due  to  corrections  from 
calibrations,  the  plus  correction  for  the  left  front  dynamometer  being 
more  than  for  any  other  dynamometer. 

Speed  of  driving  and  brake  wheels  is  generally  higher  when  the 
boiler  gage  pressure  is  higher  because  setting  of  throttle  and  reverse 
levers  and  brake  loads  (in  pounds)  were  all  kept  as  nearly  constant 
as  possible  for  all  runs. 

Except  for  Runs  4 and  19,  ranges  in  pounds  of  coal  fired  per  hour 


are  as  follows : 

Total  1,942  to  2,341 

Per  sq.  ft.  of  grate  area 111.0  to  133.8 

Per  sq.  ft.  of  boiler  heating  surface 2.01  to  2.43 


Next  to  the  greatest  equivalent  evaporation  is  recorded  for  Run  4, 
and  the  least  for  Run  19. 

Pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F.  per  hour, 


for  all  runs  range  as  follows: 

Total  12,090  to  14.750 

Per  sq.  ft.  of  boiler  heating  surface 12.54  to  15.29 


30 


Boiler  horse  power  developed,  on  the  basis  of  34.5  pounds  of  equiva- 
lent evaporation  per  hour,  ranges  from  350.5  to  427.5.  See  Fig.  1. 

Pounds  of  air  supplied  per  pound  carbon  based  upon  averages  of  flue 
gas  analysis  show  a comparatively  wide  variation,  from  15.0  to  21.5. 

Ranges  in  boiler  and  grate  efficiency  (item  61)  are  as  follows: 

Illinois  coal  54.1%  to  63.2% 

Iowa  coal  60.0%  to  67.6% 

Percentage  of  heat  lost  by  flue  gases,  moisture  in  coal,  CO,  and  ash 
and  refuse  are  all  reasonably  constant  for  all  runs. 

Heat  lost  and  unaccounted  for  (item  72)  ranges  from  5.5%  to  17.8%. 
This  item  also  includes  such  unavoidable  minor  errors  as  may  exist  in 
items  67  to  71. 

Differences  of  speed  between  drivers  and  support  wheels  for  the  same 
run  are  very  slight  and  quite  constant.  The  average  indicates  about  0.12% 
slip. 

Estimated  draw-bar  horse  power  ranges  from  264.3  1°  309.4  for  all 
runs. 

Range  of  efficiencies  (items  100-102)  for  all  runs  are  as  follows: 

Thermal,  of  cylinders 5.89%  to  7.14% 

Machine,  of  locomotive 85.9%  to  90.8% 

From  coal  to  draw -bar  power: 

Illinois  coals  3.00%  to  3.54% 

Iowa  coals  3.42%  to  3.98% 

Some  of  the  calculated  values  in  Tables  III  to  X are  in  terms  of  large 
decimal  units  compared  with  many  conventional  test  report  data  from 
other  sources.  This  does  not  mean  careless  nor  extremely  rough  calcula- 
tions, although  most  multiplications  and  divisions  were  performed  with 
the  slide  rule.  The  writer  sees  more  disadvantage  than  advantage  in  re- 
porting a value  to  the  nearest  tenth  or  hundredth  of  one  per  cent  when 
the  original  reading  upon  which  the  value  is  based  mav  have  been  off  one. 
two,  or  more  per  cent.  Such  errors  of  observation  are  unavoidable  in 
many  cases  because  of  the  difficulty  of  securing  representative  samples  or 
of  properly  locating  an  instrument. 


1 


Indicator  Cards.  Such  indicator  cards  as  were  taken  during  these 
test  runs  were  intended  only  for  supplementary  data.  The  same  per- 
son took  cards  from  both  cylinders,  and  consequently  a few  seconds 
of  time  elapsed  between  the  making  of  corresponding  cards  from  op- 
posite cylinders.  Instantaneous  speeds  were  not  read.  Indicated 
horse  power  was  calculated  for  each  end  of  each  cylinder  by  taking 
the  average  mean  effective  pressure  for  a run  and  multiplying  it  by  the 
average  speed  for  the  run  and  by  the  engine  constant. 

For  Runs  1 to  8,  mean  effective  pressure  in  the  head  end  of  the 
left  cylinder  appears  higher  than  for  any  other  cylinder  end.  For 
Runs  9,  11  and  18  to  22,  the  highest  pressure  appears  to  be  in  the  crank 
end  of  the  left  cylinder.  This  inconsistency  may  be  due  to  a change 
in  the  valve  motion,  or  to  an  unexplained  variation  of  other  conditions. 

Consistent  differences  of  pressure  in  different  cylinder  ends  may 
be  due  to  different  net  piston  areas  and  to  faulty  valve  action.  Con- 
siderable lost  motion  was  noted  in  the  link  motion  controlling  valve 
movements  during  operation. 

Figs.  7 to  14  are  from  tracings  of  cards  chosen  as  typical  of  those 
secured  during  periods  of  runs  when  the  minimum  of  variations  in 
differences  between  pressure  in  different  cylinder  ends  was  noted.  All 
pressures  noted  in  connection  with  these  illustrations  are  in  terms  of 
pounds  per  square  inch. 

Late  admission  and  late  cut-off  are  noted  in  Fig.  7,  and  the  mean 
effective  pressure  is  considerably  less  in  the  crank  end  than  in  the 
head  end  of  the  left  cylinder.  This  condition  appeared  to  exist  during 
most  of  Runs  1,  2 and  3. 

The  point  of  cut-off  appears  to  vary  somewhat  between  different 
cards,  and  indicates  the  possibility  of  irregular  action  in  the  link  or 
valve  motion. 


32 


ISO 

too 


ISO 


100 

so 


Indicator  Cards  Taken  During-  Run  No.  3. 


Fig.  7 1 

Right  Cylinder  ! 

Fig.  8 

Left  Cylinder 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

Mean  effective  pressure 

52 

57 

73 

77 

Initial  pressure  

81 

88 

114 

114 

Rack  pressure  at  50%  of  stroke 

11 

9 

10 

10 

Indicated  hp.  at  93.6  r.  p.  m 

69 

77 

91 

99 

Per  cent  of  stroke  at  cut-off 

57 

56 

44 

48 

33 


Fig.  0 

! Right  Cylinder 

Fig.  10 

Left  Cylinder 

1 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

Mean  effective  pressure 

62 

59 

65 

1 67 

Initial  pressure  

96 

93 

102 

103 

Back  pressure  at  50%  of  stroke 

9 

8 

10 

10 

Tndioated  hp  at  02.0  r p m 

81 

79 

81  1 

85 

Per  cent  of  stroke  at  cut-off 

44 

48 

45 

45 

34 


150 

100 

50 


Fig-.  11 

Right  Cylinder 

Fig.  12 

Left  Cylinder 

Mean  effective  pressure 

Initial  pressure  

C.  E. 

62  i 

98 

10  | 
78 

46 

H.  E. 

63 

99 

10 

81 

49 

C.  E.  j 
63 

103 

10 

75 

47 

H.  E. 

61 

102 

10 

75 

45 

Back  pressure  at  50%  of  stroke .. 

Indicated  hp.  at  89.3  r.  p.  m 

Per  cent  of  stroke  at  cut-off 

35 


/SO 
ZOO 
SO 

Fig.  13 


/so 

/oo 

so 


Fig-.  13 

Right  Cylinder 

Fig.  14 

Left  Cylinder 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

C.  E. 

H.  E. 

Mean  effective  pressure 

59 

1 58 

62 

61 

Initial  pressure  

95 

98 

106 

105 

Back  pressure  at  50%  of  stroke 

10 

10 

11 

11 

Indicated  hp.  at  90.8  r.  p.  m 

76 

76 

75 

76 

Per  cent  of  stroke  at  cut-off 

48 

48 

47 

45 

TABLE  IX 

AVERAGES  OF  READINGS  AND  RESULTS 
BY  CAR  LOADS  OF  COAL 


1 

Column  No 

1 

2 

3 

Coal 

Illinois 

Iowa 

Iowa 

Car  No 

1 

2 

3 

7 I 

4 

4 

I tem 
No. 

AVERAGES  AND  TOTALS  FROM  READINGS 

1 

GENERAL 

1-7 

8, 9, 11, 18 
2.50 

i 19-22 

3 

2.39 

2.50 

4 

FURNACE  AND  BOILER 

Boiler  gage  pressure,  lb.  per  sq.  in 

127.9 

127.1 

127.0 

Barometer,  inches  mercury 

28.84 

28.80 

29.08 

6 

Drafts,  inches  of  water 

Ash  pan 

0.13 

0.09 

0.15 

4.3 

4.2 

3.9 

8 

Smoke  box,  front 

7 . 7 

7.5 

7.0 

9 

Temperatures,  degrees  F. 

Outdoor  air 

44 

53 

50 

10 

Engine  room  air  

60 

68 

60 

11 

Feed  water 

51 

53 

52 

12 

Dome  calorimeter 

263 

261 

263 

13 

Smoke  box 

810 

796 

774 

14 

Flue  gas,  per  cents 

10.4 

10.5 

11.4 

Oxygen  (O) 

7.2 

6.4 

6.1 

16 

Carbon  monoxide  (CO) 

0.2 

0.2 

4).  1 

17 

5,356 

5,357 

4,834 

26,197 

18 

Total  pounds  water  for  run 

27,332 

28,472 

19 

Total  pounds  ash  and  refuse  for  run 

321 

312 

208 

20 

ENGINE  AND  BRAKES 

Brake  loads,  pounds 

Right  rear 

1,508 

1,552 

1,499 

1,538 

1,490 

1,539 

21 

Right  front 

22 

Left  rear 

1,547 

1,552 

1,552 

23 

Left  front 

1,676 

1,690 

1,647 

24 

Total 

6,283 

6,279 

6,228 

25 

Speed  of  driver,  r.  p.  m 

92.6 

93.1 

i 90.0 

26 

Speed  of  support  wheel,  r.  p.  m 

1 106.5 

106.7 

1 103.1 

Item 

No. 

CALCULATED  RESULTS  OF  BOILER  TRIALS 

FUEL  AND  ASH  PER  HOUR 

Coal  as  fired 

Pounds  

2,236 

2,143 

1,933 

28 

29 

30 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  grate  area 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  heating  surface 

Dry  coal 

Pounds  

127  8 

2 ! 32 

1,937 

122.5 

2 22 

1,795 

110.5 

2.00 

1,633 

31 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  grate  area 

110.8 

102.6 

93.3 

32 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  heating  surface 

2.01 

1.86 

1.69 

33 

Combustible  coal 

Pounds 

1,604 

1,461 

1 ,368 

34 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  grate  area 

91 . 7 

83.5 

78.2 

35 

Pounds  per  sq.  ft.  of  heating  surface 

1 .66 

1.51 

1.42 

36 

B.  t.  u.  in  coal  fired  (thousands) 

22,430 

20,000 

19,210 

37 

Pounds  combustible  coal  “consumed” 

1,580 

1,434 

1 ,348 

38 

Pounds  ash  and  refuse 

135 

125 

83 

39 

B.  t.  u.  in  ash  and  refuse,  (thousands) * 

330 

400 

290 

40 

B.  t.  u.  in  combustible  “consumed,”  (thousands) 

22,100 

19,630 

18,920 

41 

WATER  AND  STEAM 

Pounds  supplied  boiler  per  hour 

11,450 

11,390 

10,480 

42 

Quality  of  steam,  per  cent 

98.0 

97.9 

98.0 

43 

Moisture  in  steam,  per  cent 

2.0 

2.1 

2.0 

44 

Pounds  dry  steam  per  hour 

11,210 

11,150 

10,270 

45 

Factor  of  evaporation  

1 .209 

1.207 

1.208 

46 

Equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212  deg.  F.,  pounds 
per  hour 

13,560 

13,450 

12,410 

47 

Equivalent  evaporation  (212°),  per  hour,  per  sq.  ft.  of 
heating  surface  

14.06 

13.95 

12.87 

48 

49 

B.  t.  u.  absorbed  per  hour  by  dry  steam,  (thousands)  .... 
B.  t.  u.  absorbed  per  pound  dry  coal 

13,160 

6,820 

13,060 

7,270 

12,050 

7,390 

50 

B.  t.  u.  absorbed  per  pound  combustible 

8,230 

8,930 

8,830 

37 


TABLE  IX  (Continued) 

AVERAGES  OF  READINGS  AND  RESULTS 
BY  CAR  LOADS  OF  COAL 


Column  No 

Coal 

Car  No 

Number  of  runs  averaged 

1 

Illinois 

1 

7 

2 

Iowa 

2 

4 

3 

Iowa 

3 

4 

1 

Rim  Nos 

1-7 

8,  9,  1 1,18 

19-22 

51 

BOILER  PERFORMANCE 

Pounds  of  boiler  feed  water 

Per  pound  coal  as  fired 

5.13 

5.31 

5.43 

52 

Per  pound  dry  coal 

5.93 

6.34 

6.43 

53 

Per  pound  combustible  coal 

7.16 

7.79 

7.68 

54 

Pounds  of  dry  steam 

Per  pound  coal  as  fired 

5.03 

5.20 

5.32 

55 

Per  pound  dry  coal 

5.81 

6.20 

6.31 

56 

Per  pound  combustible  coal 

7.01 

7.62 

7.52 

57 

Pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  (212°) 

Per  pound  coal  as  fired 

6.08 

6.27 

6.43 

58 

Per  pound  dry  coal 

7.02 

7.49 

7.62 

59 

Per  pound  combustible  coal 

8.48 

9.20 

9.10 

60 

Efficiencies  in  per  cents 

Boiler 

59.8 

66.4 

63.8 

61 

Boiler  and  grate 

58.9 

65.1 

62.9 

62 

393  0 

390.0 

359.6 

17.5 

63 

Flue  gases 

Total  per  cent  of  CO2,  O,  and  CO 

17.9 

17.2 

64 

Per  cent  of  nitrogen 

82. 1 

82.8 

82.5 

65 

Ratio,  oxygen  supplied  to  that  used 

1.52 

1.43 

1.40 

66 

Pounds  air  per  pound  carbon 

17.6 

16.6 

16.2 

67 

Boiler  balance  sheet,  by  per  cents 

Heating  and  evaporating  boiler  water 

58.9 

65.1 

62.9 

68 

Heat  lost  in  flue  gases 

22.8 

20.7 

20.0 

69 

Heat  lost  by  moisture  in  coal 

1.9 

2.5 

2.2 

70 

Heat  lost  in  CO 

1.2 

1.5 

0.3 

71 

Heat  lost  in  ash  and  refuse 

1.5 

2.0 

1.5 

72 

Heat  lost  and  unaccounted  for  in  radiation,  sparks, 
smoke,  water  of  combustion,  error,  etc 

13.7 

8.2 

13. 1 

73 

Total  heat  supplied  in  coal 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Item 

I CALCULATED  RESULTS  OF  ENGINE  AND  BRAKE 

No. 

DATA 

1 

74 

Mean  effective  pressures,  lb.  per  sq.  in. 

Right  cylinder,  crank  end 

59 

j 

59 

61 

75 

Right  cylinder,  head  end 

59 

60 

61 

76 

Left  cylinder,  crank  end 

68 

67 

64 

77 

Left  cylinder,  head  end 

70 

65 

62 

78 

Indicated  horse  power 

Right  cylinder,  crank  end 

78 

78 

78 

79 

Right  cylinder,  head  end 

79 

81 

78 

80 

Left  cylinder,  crank  end 

84 

83 

77 

81 

Left  cylinder,  head  end 

89 

83 

77 

82 

Total 

330 

325 

310 

6.24 

83 

Per  indicated  horse-power-hour 

Pounds  coal  as  fired 

6.78 

6.61 

84 

Pounds  dry  coal 

5.87 

5.53 

5.26 

85 

B.  t.  u.  in  fuel 

68,000 

61,700 

61,900 

86 

Pounds  water 

34.7 

35.3 

33.8 

87 

Pounds  dry  steam 

34.0 

34.4 

33.1 

88  1 

B.  t.  u.  in  steam 

39,600 

40,200 

16.53 

38,800 

15.97 

15.95 

89 

Speed  in  miles  per  hour 

Driver 

16.51 

90 

Support  wheel 

16.49 

16.51 

91 

Brake  horse  power  developed 

277.0  I 

277.0 

265 . 5 

92 

Estimated  draw-bar  pull,  pounds 

6,559 

6,555 

6,502 

93 

Estimated  draw-bar  horse  power 

288 . 5 

288.6 

276.6 

94 

Per  estimated  draw-bar  horse-power-hour 

Pounds  coal  as  fired 

7.75  | 

7 . 43 

6.99 

95 

Pounds  dry  coal 

6.71 

6.22 

5 . 90 

96 

Pounds  water 

39.7 

39 . 5 

37 . 9 

97 

Pounds  dry  steam 

38 . 9 

38 . 6 

37.2 

98 

B.  t.  u.  in  fuel 

77,700  1 

69,400 

69,500 

99 

B.  t.  u.  in  steam 

45,300 

43,600 

6 . 55 

100 

Efficiencies  in  per  cents 

Thermal,  of  cylinders 

6.38 

6 . 36 

101 

Machine,  of  locomotive 

87.4 

88.9 

89.  1 

102 

From  coal  to  draw-bar  power 

3.29  1 

3 67 

3 . 68 

TABLE  X 

AVERAGES  OF  IMPORTANT  READINGS  AND  RESULTS 
BY  COALS 


Column  No 

Coal 

Car  Nos 

1 

Illinois 

1 

7 

2 

Iowa 

2,  3 

8 

Number  of  runs  averaged 

Item 

No. 

1 

1-7 

8,  9,  11, 

18-22 

3 

Duration  of  run,  hours 

2.39 

2.50 

4 

Boiler  gage  pressure,  lb.  per  sq.  in 

127.9 

127.0 

8 

Draft  in  smoke  box,  front,  inches  water 

7.7 

7.3 

11 

Temperature,  boiler  feed  water,  °F 

51 

52 

13 

Temperature,  smoke  box,  °F 

810 

785 

17 

Total  pounds  coal  as  fired,  for  run 

5,356 

5,095 

18 

Total  pounds  feed  water  for  run 

27,332 

27,335 

19 

Total  pounds  ash  and  refuse  for  run 

321 

260 

24 

Total  brake  load,  pounds 

6,283 

6,254 

27 

Total  pounds  coal  fired,  per  hour 

2,236 

2,038 

28 

Pounds  coal  fired  per  sq.  ft.  of  grate  per  hour 

127.8 

116.5 

29 

Pounds  coal  fired  per  sq.  ft.  of  heating  surface,  per  hour 

2.32 

2.11 

41 

Pounds  feed  water  per  hour 

11,450 

10,930 

42 

Quality  of  steam,  per  cent 

98.0 

98.0 

44 

Pounds  dry  steam  per  hour 

11,210 

10,710 

46 

Equivalent  evaporation  from  and  at  212°  F.,  pounds  per  hour.  . . 

13,560 

12,930 

47 

Equivalent  evaporation  (212°)  per  hour  per  sq.  ft.  of  heating  sur- 

face  

14.06 

13.41 

51 

Pounds  of  feed  water  per  pound  coal  as  fired 

5.13 

5.37 

55 

Pounds  of  dry  steam  per  pound  dry  coal 

5.81 

6.26 

57 

Pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  (212°)  per  pound  coal  as  fired.  . . . 

6.08 

6.35 

58 

Pounds  of  equivalent  evaporation  (212°),  per  pound  dry  coal 

7.02 

7.56 

60 

Efficiency  of  boiler,  per  cent 

59.8 

65.1 

62 

Boiler  horse  power  developed 

393.0 

374.8 

65 

Ratio,  oxygen  supplied  to  that  used 

1.52 

1.41 

Boiler  balance  sheet,  by  per  cents 

67 

Heating  and  evaporating  boiler  water 

58.9 

64.0 

68 

Heat  lost  in  flue  gases 

22.8 

20.3 

69 

Heat  lost  by  moisture  in  coal 

1.9 

2.3 

70 

Heat  lost  in  CO  . 

1.2 

0.9 

71 

Heat  lost  in  ash  and  refuse 

1.5 

1.8 

72 

Heat  lost  and  unaccounted  for  in  radiation,  sparks,  smoke,  water 

of  combustion,  error,  etc 

13.7 

10.7 

73 

Total  heat  supplied  in  coal 

100.0 

100.0 

82 

Total  indicated  horse-power 

330 

317 

83 

Pounds  coal  as  fired  per  indicated  horse-power-hour 

6.78 

6.42 

84 

Pounds  dry  coal  per  indicated  horse-power-hour 

5.87 

5.39 

86 

Pounds  feed  water  per  indicated  horse-power-hour 

34.7 

34.5 

87 

Pounds  dry  steam  per  indicated  horse-power-hour 

34.0 

33.7 

89 

Speed  of  driver,  miles  per  hour 

16.51 

16.25 

92 

Estimated  draw-bar  pull,  pounds 

6,559 

6,529 

93 

Estimated  draw-bar  horse  power 

288.5 

282.6 

94 

Pounds  coal  as  fired  per  estimated  draw-bar  horse-power-hour .... 

7.75 

7.21 

95 

Pounds  dry  coal  per  estimated  draw-bar  horse-power-hour 

6.71 

6.06 

96 

Pounds  feed  water  per  estimated  draw-bar  horse-power-hour 

39.7 

38.7 

97 

Pounds  dry  steam  per  estimated  draw-bar  horse-power-hour 

38.9 

37.9 

100 

Thermal  efficiency  of  cylinders,  per  cent 

6.38 

6 . 45 

101 

Machine  efficiency  of  locomotive,  per  cent 

87.4 

89.0 

102 

Efficiency,  from  coal  to  draw-bar  power,  per  cent 

3.29 

3.67 

39 


Group  Averages.  Table  IX  contains  averages  of  all  items  (except 
date  of  run)  found  in  Tables  VI  to  VIII.  Column  1,  of  Table  IX,  in- 
cludes all  test  runs  on  Illinois  coal.  Column  2 includes  all  runs  on 
the  first  car  of  Iowa  coal  reported  in  Tables  VI  to  VIII.  Column  3, 
includes  all  runs  on  the  second  car  of  Iowa  coal  reported  in  Tables  VI 
to  VIII. 

The  principal  differences  to  be  noted  between  values  in  columns 
2 and  3 are  that  more  coal  and  water  are  used,  more  boiler  power  and 
engine  power  are  developed,  and  that  better  boiler  efficiency  results 
from  averages  of  Runs  8,  9,  11  and  18  than  of  Runs  19  to  22. 

Table  X presents  the  most  compact  summary  for  comparison  of 
results  from  the  Illinois  and  Iowa  coals.  Only  the  most  vital  items 
are  chosen  from  Tables  VI  to  VIII.  Column  1 of  Table  X includes 
all  runs  on  the  Illinois  coal.  Column  2 includes  all  runs,  on  Iowa  coal, 
reported  in  Tables  VI  to  VIII. 

In  the  average  conditions  for  Illinois  and  Iowa  coal  as  presented 
in  Table  X,  the  following  points  are  noted  : 

Boiler  gage  pressures  are  practically  the  same. 

Smoke  box  drafts  and  temperature  are  somewhat  higher  for  Illinois 
coals. 

Pounds  of  coal  fired  per  hour  are  less  for  Iowa  coal. 

Pounds  of  feed  water,  dry  steam,  and  equivalent  evaporation  are 
more  for  Illinois  coal. 

Quality  of  steam  in  dome  is  the  same. 

A greater  excess  of  furnace  air  is  evident  with  Illinois  coal. 

Boiler,  indicated,  and  estimated  draw-bar  horse  powers  developed 
are  greater  with  Illinois  coal. 

Speed  of  drivers  and  estimated  draw-bar  pull  are  somewhat  higher 
with  Illinois  coal. 

Thermal  efficiency  of  cylinders  and  machine  efficiency  of  locomo- 
tive are  not  dependent  directly  upon  the  character  of  coal.  They  are 
both  slightly  higher  with  Iowa  coal. 

Boiler  efficiency,  boiler  and  grate  efficiency,  boiler  performance,  en- 
gine performance  referred  to  coal,  and  efficiency  of  plant  from  coal  to 
draw-bar  power,  all  show  up  appreciably  better  with  Iowa  coal. 


40 


FIG.  15. 

View  of  Right  Hand  Brakes  on  the  Four  Support  Wheel  Axles.  Two  of  the 
locomotive  drivers  are  shown  resting  on  support  wheels.  Pipe  valves  at  the  ex- 
treme left  are  for  individual  control  of  water  pressure  in  the  brakes. 


FIG.  16. 

C.  & N.  W.  Consolidation  Type  Locomotive  No.  1769  in  Place  for  Preliminary 
Test  Work,  June,  1915. 


The  College 

The  Iowa  State  College  of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  conducts 
w^fk  along  five  major  lines: 

Agriculture 
Engineering 
Home  Economics 
Industrial  Science 
Veterinary  Medicine 

The  Graduate  Division  conducts  advanced  research  and  instruction 
in  all  these  five  lines. 

Four-year,  five-year  and  six-year  collegiate  courses  are  offered  in 
different  divisions  of  the  College.  Non-collegiate  courses  are  offered  in 
agriculture,^  engineering,  and  home  economics.  Summer  Sessions  in- 
clude graduate,  collegiate,  and  non-collegiate  work.  Short  courses  are 
offered  in  the  winter. 

Extension  courses  are  conducted  at  various  points  throughout  the 
state. 

Research  work  is  conducted  in  the  Agricultural  and  Engineering 
Experiment  Stations  and  in  the  Veterinary  Research  Laboratory. 

Special  announcements  of  the  different  branches  of  the  work  are 
supplied,  free  of  charge,  on  application.  The  general  catalogue  will  be 
sent  on  request. 

Address: 

The  Registrar,  Ames,  Iowa. 


•No. 

1. 

•No. 

2. 

•No. 

3. 

•No. 

4. 

•No. 

5. 

•No. 

6. 

•No. 

7. 

♦No. 

8. 

•No. 

9. 

•No. 

10. 

•No. 

11. 

•Vol. 

II. 

•Vol. 

III. 

•Vol. 

III. 

•Vol. 

III. 

BULLETINS  OF  THE  ENGINEERING  EXPERIMENT  STATION 

The  Iowa  State  College  Sewage  Disposal  Plant  Investigation*. 
Bacteriological  Investigations  of  the  Iowa  State  College 
Sewage. 

Data  of  Iowa  Sewage  and  Sewage  Disposal. 

Bacteriological  Investigations  of  the  Iowa  State  College  Sew- 
age Disposal  Plant. 

The  Chemical  Composition  of  the  Sewage  of  the  Iowa  State 
College  Sewage  Disposal  Plant. 

Tests  of  Iowa  Common  Brick. 

Sewage  Disposal  in  Iowa. 

Tests  of  Dry  Press  Brick  Used  in  Iowa. 

Notes  on  Steam  Generation  with  Iowa  Coal. 

Dredging  by  the  Hydraulic  Method. 

An  Investigation  of  Some  Iowa  Sewage  Disposal  Systems. 

No.  6.  The  Good  Roads  Problem  in  Iowa. 

No.  1.  Tests  of  Cement. 

No.  2.  State  Railroad  Taxation. 

Steam  Generation  with  Iowa  Coals. 

Incandescent  Lamp  Testing. 

Steam  Pipe  Covering  Tests. 

The  Assessment  of  Drainage  Districts. 

Tests  of  Iowa  Limes. 

Holding  Power  of  Nails  in  Single  Shear. 

Miracle  Contest  Papers  for  1908.  (Theses  on  Cement 
and  Concrete.) 

Miracle  Prize  Papers  for  1909.  (Theses  on  Cement 
and  Concrete.) 

Sanitary  Examination  of  Water  Supplies. 

Sewage  Disposal  Plants  for  Private  Houses. 

Electric  Power  on  the  Farm. 

The  Production  of  Excessive  Hydrogen  Sulfid  in  Sew- 
age Disposal  Plants  and  Consequent  Disintegration 
of  the  Concrete. 

A Study  of  Iowa  Population  as  Related  to  Industrial 
Conditions. 

History  of  Road  Legislation  in  Iowa. 

Costs  of  Producing  Power  in  Iowa  with  Iowa  Coals. 
The  Determination  of  Internal  Temperature  Range  in 
Concrete  Arch  Bridges. 

The  Theory  of  Loads  on  Pipes  in  Ditches,  and  Tests  of 
Cement  and  Clay  Drain  Tile  and  Sewer  Pipe. 

A Topographical  Survey  of  the  Spirit  and  Okobojl 
Lakes  Region. 

House  Heating  Fuel  Tests. 

The  Use  of  Iowa  Gravel  for  Concrete. 

The  Iowa  Engineering  Experiment  Station  and  Its 
Service  to  the  Industries  of  the  State. 

Report  of  the  Investigations  on  Drain  Tile  of  Com- 
mittee C-6,  American  Society  for  Testing  Materials. 
Bulletin  No.  37.  Illuminating  Power  of  Kerosenes. 

Bulletin  No.  38.  Electric  Central  Station  Operation  in  Iowa. 

Bulletin  No.  39.  Good  Roads  and  Community  Life. 

♦Bulletin  No.  40.  An  Investigation  of  Iowa  Fire  Clays. 

Bulletin  No.  41.  Sewage  Disposal  for  Village  and  Rural  Homes. 

Bulletin  No.  42.  A Study  of  Oil  Engines  in  Iowa  Power  Plants. 

Bulletin  No.  43.  Practical  Handling  of  Iowa  Clays. 

Bulletin  No.  44.  Locomotive  Tests  with  Iowa  and  Illinois  Coals. 
Bulletin  No.  45.  Investigations  of  Gravel  for  Road  Surfacing. 

♦Out  of  print.  Bulletins  not  out  of  print  will  be  sent  free  upon  request 
addressed  to  The  Director,  Engineering  Experiment  Station,  Ames,  Iowa, 


Vol.  III.  No.  4. 
•Vol.  III.  No.  5. 
•Vol.  III.  No.  6. 
Vol.  IV.  No.  1. 
Vol.  IV.  No.  2. 
Vol.  IV.  No.  3. 

Vol.  IV.  No.  4. 

Vol.  IV.  No.  5. 
Vol.  IV.  No.  6. 
Bulletin  No.  25. 
Bulletin  No.  26. 


Bulletin  No.  27. 

Bulletin  No.  28. 
Bulletin  No.  29. 
Bulletin  No.  30. 

Bulletin  No.  31. 

Bulletin  No.  32. 

Bulletin  No.  33. 
Bulletin  No.  34. 
Bulletin  No.  35. 

Bulletin  No.  <36. 


